Hillary won more votes for President

unsung

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

But you say that only the demise of the system will bring about change, so then the worst candidate should hasten it.

In turn begin anew.

Maybe in a couple of hundred years it could evolve in a positive direction. Not in our lifetime. But I don't consider the collapse of the government (likely to be replaced by something even worse) is the best option. Not at all. I don't know why you would assume that such a thing would result in any kind of improvement. Seems crazy.

No one is assuming anything.
Just responding to your thoughts.
Don't know why you would think that.
lol

How do you know what unsung is or isn't assuming any better than me then?

I can assume the unsung will call Hillary corrupt openly.
I can't assume you will.
Will you?

Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt individual to ever secure a major party nomination for President in my lifetime.

mrussel1

unsung said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

But you say that only the demise of the system will bring about change, so then the worst candidate should hasten it.

In turn begin anew.

Maybe in a couple of hundred years it could evolve in a positive direction. Not in our lifetime. But I don't consider the collapse of the government (likely to be replaced by something even worse) is the best option. Not at all. I don't know why you would assume that such a thing would result in any kind of improvement. Seems crazy.

No one is assuming anything.
Just responding to your thoughts.
Don't know why you would think that.
lol

How do you know what unsung is or isn't assuming any better than me then?

I can assume the unsung will call Hillary corrupt openly.
I can't assume you will.
Will you?

Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt individual to ever secure a major party nomination for President in my lifetime.

Yet she committed no crimes. Amazing statement.

PJfanwillneverleave1

PJ_Soul said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

But you say that only the demise of the system will bring about change, so then the worst candidate should hasten it.

In turn begin anew.

Maybe in a couple of hundred years it could evolve in a positive direction. Not in our lifetime. But I don't consider the collapse of the government (likely to be replaced by something even worse) is the best option. Not at all. I don't know why you would assume that such a thing would result in any kind of improvement. Seems crazy.

No one is assuming anything.
Just responding to your thoughts.
Don't know why you would think that.
lol

How do you know what unsung is or isn't assuming any better than me then?

I can assume the unsung will call Hillary corrupt openly.
I can't assume you will.
Will you?

I'm not fucking playing this game with you. Stop asking me a question I already answered the first time.

I'll take that as a no.

PJ_Soul

unsung said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

But you say that only the demise of the system will bring about change, so then the worst candidate should hasten it.

In turn begin anew.

Maybe in a couple of hundred years it could evolve in a positive direction. Not in our lifetime. But I don't consider the collapse of the government (likely to be replaced by something even worse) is the best option. Not at all. I don't know why you would assume that such a thing would result in any kind of improvement. Seems crazy.

No one is assuming anything.
Just responding to your thoughts.
Don't know why you would think that.
lol

How do you know what unsung is or isn't assuming any better than me then?

I can assume the unsung will call Hillary corrupt openly.
I can't assume you will.
Will you?

Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt individual to ever secure a major party nomination for President in my lifetime.

So you're how old? 15 or so?

lukin2006

Hillary Wants To Make It Official With ISIS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoY16tJvhQo

lol

Gern Blansten

unsung said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

But you say that only the demise of the system will bring about change, so then the worst candidate should hasten it.

In turn begin anew.

Maybe in a couple of hundred years it could evolve in a positive direction. Not in our lifetime. But I don't consider the collapse of the government (likely to be replaced by something even worse) is the best option. Not at all. I don't know why you would assume that such a thing would result in any kind of improvement. Seems crazy.

No one is assuming anything.
Just responding to your thoughts.
Don't know why you would think that.
lol

How do you know what unsung is or isn't assuming any better than me then?

I can assume the unsung will call Hillary corrupt openly.
I can't assume you will.
Will you?

Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt individual to ever secure a major party nomination for President in my lifetime.

Do you get satellite TV in your bubble?

PJfanwillneverleave1

Gern Blansten said:

unsung said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

But you say that only the demise of the system will bring about change, so then the worst candidate should hasten it.

In turn begin anew.

Maybe in a couple of hundred years it could evolve in a positive direction. Not in our lifetime. But I don't consider the collapse of the government (likely to be replaced by something even worse) is the best option. Not at all. I don't know why you would assume that such a thing would result in any kind of improvement. Seems crazy.

No one is assuming anything.
Just responding to your thoughts.
Don't know why you would think that.
lol

How do you know what unsung is or isn't assuming any better than me then?

I can assume the unsung will call Hillary corrupt openly.
I can't assume you will.
Will you?

Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt individual to ever secure a major party nomination for President in my lifetime.

Do you get satellite TV in your bubble?

Et tu, Brute

HughFreakingDillon

rssesq said:

BS44325 said:

Free said:

rssesq said:

https://twitter.com/Morning_Joe/status/791588439917367297

#BILLCLINTONINC.
69 MILLION DOLLARS!

Follow the $$$$!

The corruption by the Clintons is undeniable now. I accept Trump is an asshole and yet still think he's a better choice by my own stupid calculus. I wish the Clinton supporters would at least say "I know Hillary and Bill are corrupt as fuck but I'm still with her". Can't we all just be honest at this point? Even is she wins don't you want her held to a better standard?

Not a one will answer this. They wanna talk about how any criticism of the current system is "racist". Find new material. This is straight outta the Abe Foxman playbook.

How many times do I have to say this before you rubes stop saying no one will say it?

HughFreakingDillon

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

carry on not addressing the recent wikis and her unquenchable thirst for the dolla dolla bill y'all.

I am confused. I thought most Americans are really gung-ho about making money.

that's what funny about this. nothing is addressed about Trump's legal avoidance of taxes and bankruptcy claims which left thousands of workers and vendors without payment, but aw, "Hillary likes to make money making speeches! for shame!". And all this "queen" talk leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. You never heard anyone talk about a male POTUS or candidate as "king". what's with the queen bullshit? I'm guessing it's a dig at her supporters that the perception is they are grovelling idiots who will bow down to her and believe everything she says. which is rubbish. almost all of them have already plainly stated that they'd only prefer her over Trump, because that's the choice they were given. no other reason.

PRIVATE CITIZEN. duhhhhh

So Bill Clinton was expected to do what after leaving the White House? Never work again?
So you think that people who work for government have no right to secondary incomes?

jesus, no kidding. what a stupid argument.

Having his Secretary of State wife line up cash donors from Russian oligarchs to Moroccan Kings for PAY FOR PLAY services is wholey kosher. lmao

of course it's not. but.....Trump.

Why? Because he's said bad things?

no, because of what he has said he WILL do if he wins. it will be an unmitigated disaster.

So you don't think Congress will stifle him?

Of course they will. So he will get nothing done at the same time as ruining global relations because of what he tries to get done. He will do immeasurable damage on the diplomatic stage. And thats saying something given americas track record in that area.

PJfanwillneverleave1

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

carry on not addressing the recent wikis and her unquenchable thirst for the dolla dolla bill y'all.

I am confused. I thought most Americans are really gung-ho about making money.

that's what funny about this. nothing is addressed about Trump's legal avoidance of taxes and bankruptcy claims which left thousands of workers and vendors without payment, but aw, "Hillary likes to make money making speeches! for shame!". And all this "queen" talk leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. You never heard anyone talk about a male POTUS or candidate as "king". what's with the queen bullshit? I'm guessing it's a dig at her supporters that the perception is they are grovelling idiots who will bow down to her and believe everything she says. which is rubbish. almost all of them have already plainly stated that they'd only prefer her over Trump, because that's the choice they were given. no other reason.

PRIVATE CITIZEN. duhhhhh

So Bill Clinton was expected to do what after leaving the White House? Never work again?
So you think that people who work for government have no right to secondary incomes?

jesus, no kidding. what a stupid argument.

Having his Secretary of State wife line up cash donors from Russian oligarchs to Moroccan Kings for PAY FOR PLAY services is wholey kosher. lmao

of course it's not. but.....Trump.

Why? Because he's said bad things?

no, because of what he has said he WILL do if he wins. it will be an unmitigated disaster.

So you don't think Congress will stifle him?

Of course they will. So he will get nothing done at the same time as ruining global relations because of what he tries to get done. He will do immeasurable damage on the diplomatic stage. And thats saying something given americas track record in that area.

Ok.
Without wanting a response of "As a Trump supporter or a (rightist)" what is this immeasurable damage he will do?
Please don't respond with he build a wall.

lukin2006

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

carry on not addressing the recent wikis and her unquenchable thirst for the dolla dolla bill y'all.

I am confused. I thought most Americans are really gung-ho about making money.

that's what funny about this. nothing is addressed about Trump's legal avoidance of taxes and bankruptcy claims which left thousands of workers and vendors without payment, but aw, "Hillary likes to make money making speeches! for shame!". And all this "queen" talk leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. You never heard anyone talk about a male POTUS or candidate as "king". what's with the queen bullshit? I'm guessing it's a dig at her supporters that the perception is they are grovelling idiots who will bow down to her and believe everything she says. which is rubbish. almost all of them have already plainly stated that they'd only prefer her over Trump, because that's the choice they were given. no other reason.

PRIVATE CITIZEN. duhhhhh

So Bill Clinton was expected to do what after leaving the White House? Never work again?
So you think that people who work for government have no right to secondary incomes?

jesus, no kidding. what a stupid argument.

Having his Secretary of State wife line up cash donors from Russian oligarchs to Moroccan Kings for PAY FOR PLAY services is wholey kosher. lmao

of course it's not. but.....Trump.

Why? Because he's said bad things?

no, because of what he has said he WILL do if he wins. it will be an unmitigated disaster.

So you don't think Congress will stifle him?

Of course they will. So he will get nothing done at the same time as ruining global relations because of what he tries to get done. He will do immeasurable damage on the diplomatic stage. And thats saying something given americas track record in that area.

Oh definitely, the US would not want their reputation damaged by a loudmouth, its much more effective damaging your reputation through war, bullying and meddling...

HughFreakingDillon

I don't know how many times this has to be stated: it is a fact, in my opinion, that you simply cannot get to the highest office in the land without backroom bullshit. I am shocked that nothing about Obama has come to light. Maybe he's the exception, maybe he's just that damn good. Either way both hillary and donald are not immune. If you think he is anti establishment, you are a fool. If you think he gives a shit about you, you are a fool. If you think he wont use the presidency as a springboard to make millions afterwards, you are a fool.

Either participate in the system or dont. But dont even try to put one candidate on a an anti corruption pedestal over the other. If you do, you are a fool.

It comes down, unfortunately, in this particular election, of who you think wont put the country into the ground financially, socially, progressively, and diplomatically.

To me, without question, that person is hillary. Trump has the bigger potential to be a trainwreck. He is a massive risk that i cant believe so many are comfortable taking. With hillary, you get more of the same. With trump, you dont have a sweet clue what you are getting.

PJfanwillneverleave1

HughFreakingDillon said:

I don't know how many times this has to be stated: it is a fact, in my opinion, that you simply cannot get to the highest office in the land without backroom bullshit. I am shocked that nothing about Obama has come to light. Maybe he's the exception, maybe he's just that damn good. Either way both hillary and donald are not immune. If you think he is anti establishment, you are a fool. If you think he gives a shit about you, you are a fool. If you think he wont use the presidency as a springboard to make millions afterwards, you are a fool.

Either participate in the system or dont. But dont even try to put one candidate on a an anti corruption pedestal over the other. If you do, you are a fool.

It comes down, unfortunately, in this particular election, of who you think wont put the country into the ground financially, socially, progressively, and diplomatically.

To me, without question, that person is hillary. Trump has the bigger potential to be a trainwreck. He is a massive risk that i cant believe so many are comfortable taking. With hillary, you get more of the same. With trump, you dont have a sweet clue what you are getting.

That is a nice response.
Perhaps the ever so slight majority is tired of the same.
And what is sweet is that they kind of like what they may get.

unsung

mrussel1 said:

unsung said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

But you say that only the demise of the system will bring about change, so then the worst candidate should hasten it.

In turn begin anew.

Maybe in a couple of hundred years it could evolve in a positive direction. Not in our lifetime. But I don't consider the collapse of the government (likely to be replaced by something even worse) is the best option. Not at all. I don't know why you would assume that such a thing would result in any kind of improvement. Seems crazy.

No one is assuming anything.
Just responding to your thoughts.
Don't know why you would think that.
lol

How do you know what unsung is or isn't assuming any better than me then?

I can assume the unsung will call Hillary corrupt openly.
I can't assume you will.
Will you?

Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt individual to ever secure a major party nomination for President in my lifetime.

Yet she committed no crimes. Amazing statement.

Of course not, that would mean the lawmakers would have to reign themselves in.

Its the elite vs the non-elite.

unsung

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

carry on not addressing the recent wikis and her unquenchable thirst for the dolla dolla bill y'all.

I am confused. I thought most Americans are really gung-ho about making money.

that's what funny about this. nothing is addressed about Trump's legal avoidance of taxes and bankruptcy claims which left thousands of workers and vendors without payment, but aw, "Hillary likes to make money making speeches! for shame!". And all this "queen" talk leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. You never heard anyone talk about a male POTUS or candidate as "king". what's with the queen bullshit? I'm guessing it's a dig at her supporters that the perception is they are grovelling idiots who will bow down to her and believe everything she says. which is rubbish. almost all of them have already plainly stated that they'd only prefer her over Trump, because that's the choice they were given. no other reason.

PRIVATE CITIZEN. duhhhhh

So Bill Clinton was expected to do what after leaving the White House? Never work again?
So you think that people who work for government have no right to secondary incomes?

jesus, no kidding. what a stupid argument.

Having his Secretary of State wife line up cash donors from Russian oligarchs to Moroccan Kings for PAY FOR PLAY services is wholey kosher. lmao

of course it's not. but.....Trump.

Why? Because he's said bad things?

no, because of what he has said he WILL do if he wins. it will be an unmitigated disaster.

So you don't think Congress will stifle him?

Of course they will. So he will get nothing done at the same time as ruining global relations because of what he tries to get done. He will do immeasurable damage on the diplomatic stage. And thats saying something given americas track record in that area.

I see similar results for clinton. She'd just destroy us domestically as well.

unsung

lukin2006 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

carry on not addressing the recent wikis and her unquenchable thirst for the dolla dolla bill y'all.

I am confused. I thought most Americans are really gung-ho about making money.

that's what funny about this. nothing is addressed about Trump's legal avoidance of taxes and bankruptcy claims which left thousands of workers and vendors without payment, but aw, "Hillary likes to make money making speeches! for shame!". And all this "queen" talk leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. You never heard anyone talk about a male POTUS or candidate as "king". what's with the queen bullshit? I'm guessing it's a dig at her supporters that the perception is they are grovelling idiots who will bow down to her and believe everything she says. which is rubbish. almost all of them have already plainly stated that they'd only prefer her over Trump, because that's the choice they were given. no other reason.

PRIVATE CITIZEN. duhhhhh

So Bill Clinton was expected to do what after leaving the White House? Never work again?
So you think that people who work for government have no right to secondary incomes?

jesus, no kidding. what a stupid argument.

Having his Secretary of State wife line up cash donors from Russian oligarchs to Moroccan Kings for PAY FOR PLAY services is wholey kosher. lmao

of course it's not. but.....Trump.

Why? Because he's said bad things?

no, because of what he has said he WILL do if he wins. it will be an unmitigated disaster.

So you don't think Congress will stifle him?

Of course they will. So he will get nothing done at the same time as ruining global relations because of what he tries to get done. He will do immeasurable damage on the diplomatic stage. And thats saying something given americas track record in that area.

Oh definitely, the US would not want their reputation damaged by a loudmouth, its much more effective damaging your reputation through war, bullying and meddling...

LOL, think the last 16 have been bad, well the world hasn't seen anything yet.

lukin2006

unsung said:

lukin2006 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

rssesq said:

carry on not addressing the recent wikis and her unquenchable thirst for the dolla dolla bill y'all.

I am confused. I thought most Americans are really gung-ho about making money.

that's what funny about this. nothing is addressed about Trump's legal avoidance of taxes and bankruptcy claims which left thousands of workers and vendors without payment, but aw, "Hillary likes to make money making speeches! for shame!". And all this "queen" talk leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. You never heard anyone talk about a male POTUS or candidate as "king". what's with the queen bullshit? I'm guessing it's a dig at her supporters that the perception is they are grovelling idiots who will bow down to her and believe everything she says. which is rubbish. almost all of them have already plainly stated that they'd only prefer her over Trump, because that's the choice they were given. no other reason.

PRIVATE CITIZEN. duhhhhh

So Bill Clinton was expected to do what after leaving the White House? Never work again?
So you think that people who work for government have no right to secondary incomes?

jesus, no kidding. what a stupid argument.

Having his Secretary of State wife line up cash donors from Russian oligarchs to Moroccan Kings for PAY FOR PLAY services is wholey kosher. lmao

of course it's not. but.....Trump.

Why? Because he's said bad things?

no, because of what he has said he WILL do if he wins. it will be an unmitigated disaster.

So you don't think Congress will stifle him?

Of course they will. So he will get nothing done at the same time as ruining global relations because of what he tries to get done. He will do immeasurable damage on the diplomatic stage. And thats saying something given americas track record in that area.

Oh definitely, the US would not want their reputation damaged by a loudmouth, its much more effective damaging your reputation through war, bullying and meddling...

LOL, think the last 16 have been bad, well the world hasn't seen anything yet.

Agree...

lukin2006

HughFreakingDillon said:

I don't know how many times this has to be stated: it is a fact, in my opinion, that you simply cannot get to the highest office in the land without backroom bullshit. I am shocked that nothing about Obama has come to light. Maybe he's the exception, maybe he's just that damn good. Either way both hillary and donald are not immune. If you think he is anti establishment, you are a fool. If you think he gives a shit about you, you are a fool. If you think he wont use the presidency as a springboard to make millions afterwards, you are a fool.

Either participate in the system or dont. But dont even try to put one candidate on a an anti corruption pedestal over the other. If you do, you are a fool.

It comes down, unfortunately, in this particular election, of who you think wont put the country into the ground financially, socially, progressively, and diplomatically.

To me, without question, that person is hillary. Trump has the bigger potential to be a trainwreck. He is a massive risk that i cant believe so many are comfortable taking. With hillary, you get more of the same. With trump, you dont have a sweet clue what you are getting.

You really think POTUS is the highest office in the land? Is that why out of a country of 300 + million these are the best the US can do, no way sir, I seriously doubt the best and brightest enter politics...more like leeches who suck off the productivity of others.

PJfanwillneverleave1

lukin2006 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

I don't know how many times this has to be stated: it is a fact, in my opinion, that you simply cannot get to the highest office in the land without backroom bullshit. I am shocked that nothing about Obama has come to light. Maybe he's the exception, maybe he's just that damn good. Either way both hillary and donald are not immune. If you think he is anti establishment, you are a fool. If you think he gives a shit about you, you are a fool. If you think he wont use the presidency as a springboard to make millions afterwards, you are a fool.

Either participate in the system or dont. But dont even try to put one candidate on a an anti corruption pedestal over the other. If you do, you are a fool.

It comes down, unfortunately, in this particular election, of who you think wont put the country into the ground financially, socially, progressively, and diplomatically.

To me, without question, that person is hillary. Trump has the bigger potential to be a trainwreck. He is a massive risk that i cant believe so many are comfortable taking. With hillary, you get more of the same. With trump, you dont have a sweet clue what you are getting.

You really think POTUS is the highest office in the land? Is that why out of a country of 300 + million these are the best the US can do, no way sir, I seriously doubt the best and brightest enter politics...more like leeches who suck off the productivity of others.

It is very strange that a Canadian regard POTUS the highest office of the land from Canada.

HughFreakingDillon

lukin2006 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

I don't know how many times this has to be stated: it is a fact, in my opinion, that you simply cannot get to the highest office in the land without backroom bullshit. I am shocked that nothing about Obama has come to light. Maybe he's the exception, maybe he's just that damn good. Either way both hillary and donald are not immune. If you think he is anti establishment, you are a fool. If you think he gives a shit about you, you are a fool. If you think he wont use the presidency as a springboard to make millions afterwards, you are a fool.

Either participate in the system or dont. But dont even try to put one candidate on a an anti corruption pedestal over the other. If you do, you are a fool.

It comes down, unfortunately, in this particular election, of who you think wont put the country into the ground financially, socially, progressively, and diplomatically.

To me, without question, that person is hillary. Trump has the bigger potential to be a trainwreck. He is a massive risk that i cant believe so many are comfortable taking. With hillary, you get more of the same. With trump, you dont have a sweet clue what you are getting.

You really think POTUS is the highest office in the land? Is that why out of a country of 300 + million these are the best the US can do, no way sir, I seriously doubt the best and brightest enter politics...more like leeches who suck off the productivity of others.

it is the highest office. i didn't say it was occupied by the highest. an eagle's nest full of rats.